Re: Rationing

January 11, 2010

This bill will most likely cut my medical insurance premiers by much

more than half so with a very narrow short term view, this helps me

tremendously. However, the incentive to make medical progress will go

down, the benefits offered by the insurance companies will go down by

law, the costs of supplying those benefits will be regulated up up up so

that ultimately, the amount of health care I will get for my insurance

dollar will be far less than it is now.

Steve

On 1/11/2010 10:16 AM, wrote:

> Nancie, your argument is flawed. Medicare and social security benefit

> me greatly. I seriously question whether either of them are good FOR

> THE COUNTRY long term. And it is FOR THE GOOD OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE

> COUNTRY that I present my arguments; _not_ for what I think will benefit

> me or some other individual. I paid into those systems for 37 years to

> whatever extent that was required to earn the benefits I receive. No

> hypocrisy here.

>

> Where is the " RIGHT " to have medical insurance written??? What other

> RIGHTS do we have to access the results of the work of others? Food?

> Clothing? Shelter? A new car every year? What is the basis of the

> RIGHTS you quote??? If I choose to sit on my @$$ while you spend your

> life in productive labor what RIGHT do I have to demand that you provide

> me what I would like to have?

>

> Okay; so you're a liberal which means you will have a different answer

> to that question that I will give. As a conservative I suggest I have

> NO RIGHTS to the results of your labor. If I am destitute and in need

> your efforts to help me are not because I have some RIGHT to your

> resources/money/help; but rather because you see it as

> moral/religious/other imperative. But NEVER because I have the RIGHT to

> demand such from you.

>

> .

>

>>

>> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@...

>> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing>

>> aspenfairy1<aspenfairy1>

>>

>> Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:04 pm (PST)

>>

>> that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues

>> who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know

>> what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with

>> political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do

>> nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical.

>> 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can

>> you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be

>> able to get medical care when they are sick.

>> The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to

>> people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage.

>> If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any

>> Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite.

>>

>> From:

>> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM

>> hypothyroidism

>> <mailto:hypothyroidism%40>

>> Subject: Re: Rationing

>>

>> The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER

>> or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or

>> something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due

>> to lack of treatment.

>>

--

Steve - dudescholar4@...

" The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you

run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher

" Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism "

Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

January 11, 2010

Medicare is a GOVERNMENT run healthcare program ergo socialized medicine and

since you hate socialized medicine and you don't support any public option aka

Medicare for all then one would assume that you don't believe in or accept a

Governmental Healthcare program such as Medicare.

From:

Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 9:16 AM

hypothyroidism ; JAMES

Subject: Re: Rationing

Nancie, your argument is flawed. Medicare and social security benefit

me greatly. I seriously question whether either of them are good FOR

THE COUNTRY long term. And it is FOR THE GOOD OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE

COUNTRY that I present my arguments; _not_ for what I think will benefit

me or some other individual. I paid into those systems for 37 years to

whatever extent that was required to earn the benefits I receive. No

hypocrisy here.

Where is the " RIGHT " to have medical insurance written??? What other

RIGHTS do we have to access the results of the work of others? Food?

Clothing? Shelter? A new car every year? What is the basis of the

RIGHTS you quote??? If I choose to sit on my @$$ while you spend your

life in productive labor what RIGHT do I have to demand that you provide

me what I would like to have?

Okay; so you're a liberal which means you will have a different answer

to that question that I will give. As a conservative I suggest I have

NO RIGHTS to the results of your labor. If I am destitute and in need

your efforts to help me are not because I have some RIGHT to your

resources/money/help; but rather because you see it as

moral/religious/other imperative. But NEVER because I have the RIGHT to

demand such from you.

..

>

> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@...

> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing>

> aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1>

>

> Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:04 pm (PST)

>

> that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues

> who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know

> what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with

> political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do

> nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical.

> 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can

> you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be

> able to get medical care when they are sick.

> The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to

> people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage.

> If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any

> Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite.

>

> From:

> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM

> hypothyroidism

> <mailto:hypothyroidism%40>

> Subject: Re: Rationing

>

> The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER

> or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or

> something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due

> to lack of treatment.

>

January 11, 2010

People are paying and over paying for the insurance companies to enslave us

right now.

The issue is that all citizens need access to medical care and if this is not

made possible the will continue to have to go to emergency rooms, and we will

end up paying for their medical care with higher prices for doctors, hospitals

and insurance. It's six of one half a dozen of the other. Pick your poison.

Roni

<>Just because something

isn't seen doesn't mean it's

not there<>

> that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues who have

personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know what is REALLY

going on. Since they are medical providers with political connections they were

asked to help create the Bills. To do nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and

amoral and unethical. 1000's of people die every year from lack of health

insurance. how can you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the

RIGHT to be able to get medical care when they are sick.

> The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to people

who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage.

> If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any Medicare

benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite.

>

> From:

> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM

> hypothyroidism

> Subject: Re: Rationing

>

> The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER

> or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or

> something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due

> to lack of treatment.

>

> .

>

>>

>> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@...

>> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing>

>> aspenfairy1<aspenfairy1>

>>

>> Sun Jan 10, 2010 12:38 am (PST)

>>

>> -

>> there are NO " death panels in the bill and there wasn't ever any death

>> panels in the bill. that is just another republican LIE .

--

Steve - dudescholar4@...

" The Problem with Socialism is that eventually you

run out of Other People's Money. " --Margaret Thatcher

" Mistrust of Government is the Bedrock of American Patriotism "

Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

------------------------------------

January 12, 2010

I believe that everyone needs to pay something towrds their health insurance,

unless their company gives it as one of their perks. That being said, I agree

with Nanci that everyone should have access to health care, We are the only

industrialized country in the world that doesn't take care of it's citizens with

the tax money that is paid by them. Instead, our tax money goes for wars, for

aid to other countries and a bunch of things the people have not asked for and

don't want. So who's getting ripped off here? We the people are.

Roni

<>Just because something

isn't seen doesn't mean it's

not there<>

From: nancie barnett <deifspirit@...>

Subject: Re: Re: Rationing

hypothyroidism

Date: Monday, January 11, 2010, 11:49 AM

Medicare is a GOVERNMENT run healthcare program ergo socialized medicine and

since you hate socialized medicine and you don't support any public option aka

Medicare for all then one would assume that you don't believe in or accept a

Governmental Healthcare program such as Medicare.

From:

Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 9:16 AM

hypothyroidism ; JAMES

Subject: Re: Rationing

Nancie, your argument is flawed. Medicare and social security benefit

me greatly. I seriously question whether either of them are good FOR

THE COUNTRY long term. And it is FOR THE GOOD OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE

COUNTRY that I present my arguments; _not_ for what I think will benefit

me or some other individual. I paid into those systems for 37 years to

whatever extent that was required to earn the benefits I receive. No

hypocrisy here.

Where is the " RIGHT " to have medical insurance written??? What other

RIGHTS do we have to access the results of the work of others? Food?

Clothing? Shelter? A new car every year? What is the basis of the

RIGHTS you quote??? If I choose to sit on my @$$ while you spend your

life in productive labor what RIGHT do I have to demand that you provide

me what I would like to have?

Okay; so you're a liberal which means you will have a different answer

to that question that I will give. As a conservative I suggest I have

NO RIGHTS to the results of your labor. If I am destitute and in need

your efforts to help me are not because I have some RIGHT to your

resources/money/help; but rather because you see it as

moral/religious/other imperative. But NEVER because I have the RIGHT to

demand such from you.

..

>

> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@...

> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing>

> aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1>

>

> Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:04 pm (PST)

>

> that is YOUR OPINION. NOT MINE at all. I have professional colleagues

> who have personally worked on the bills in both houses and thus I know

> what is REALLY going on. Since they are medical providers with

> political connections they were asked to help create the Bills. To do

> nothing is stupid and incomprehensible and amoral and unethical.

> 1000's of people die every year from lack of health insurance. how can

> you deny them the RIGHT to have health insurance and the RIGHT to be

> able to get medical care when they are sick.

> The insurance companies have to be reigned in on their daily abuses to

> people who have coverage and to those who can't get coverage.

> If you don't Governmental health care then you better not use any

> Medicare benefits otherwise you would be a hypocrite.

>

> From:

> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2010 9:17 AM

> hypothyroidism

> <mailto:hypothyroidism%40>

> Subject: Re: Rationing

>

> The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER

> or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or

> something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due

> to lack of treatment.

>

January 12, 2010

Well, that's probably true too. We have been lied to by everyone. The

governments of both parties, the congress, the AMA, doctors, hospitals, Big

Pharma, the food industry, oil companies, insurance companies and drug

companies. I guess it all depends on what little benefits we can eke out of all

these lies. Just think, all of these entities benefit from our taxes but us.

Roni

<>Just because something

isn't seen doesn't mean it's

not there<>

>

> From: <res075oh@... <mailto:res075oh%40verizon.net>>

> Subject: Re: Rationing

> hypothyroidism

> <mailto:hypothyroidism%40>

> Date: Sunday, January 10, 2010, 9:17 AM

>

> The bottom line is you're going to face massive rationing IN SOME MANNER

> or massive increases in taxes; whether you call it a " death panel " or

> something else won't really matter to the person suffering or dying due

> to lack of treatment.

>

------------------------------------

January 12, 2010

Nancie, I cannot understand how your experience could be so different

from that of, say, my allergy specialist. He showed me the letters he

received objecting to the treatment he provided, and told me how much

time he and his staff had to expend to get it approved. It was a most

impressive stack of paper. Further he stated that for him it is

epidemic now, but will get much worse if Obamacare becomes law. And the

treatment provided was basically totally conventional; nothing

alternative or weird. More below...

..

>

> Posted by: " nancie barnett " deifspirit@...

> <mailto:deifspirit@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing>

> aspenfairy1 <aspenfairy1>

>

> Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:18 pm (PST)

>

> -

> I deal with Medicare All the time and I never have any problems with

> Medicare vs. I have problems with PRIVATE insurx providing care for

> patients. talk about rationing- the privates ration all the time and

> you always feel like there is a " 3rd person " in the room with you. I

> never have to write a TAR aka treatment authorization request with my

> Medicare patients but I have to it constantly with every private

> insurx out there.

..

> It guarantees the right to LIFE

..

No; it doesn't guarantee anything; it ASSERTS that those rights exist.

Death is guaranteed if you're alive; that you will continue to be alive

is not. And the right of liberty is taken away if you are inslaved to

benefit another. Further, your pursuit of happiness will likely be

somewhat less than enthusiastic once it becomes clear that your efforts

in your pursit will go to enhance the happiness of someone else who

would like to have the results of your labor.

..

> and today that means the right to have healthcare so that if you are

> sick you can get medical care and then you can have a LIFE. EVERY

> civilized nation on the planet provides universal coverage for it's

> citizens, except for the USA.

..

Yes; according to the Marxists/socialists/liberals the USA is the pit of

the earth. Not so to those from the utopias that you so admire who risk

torture and murder for themselves and their families to come here. I

guess things must be so bad here that you're probably planning to

emigrate to the UK or some such, right?

..

> It is no wonder that over 40,000 Americans DIE every year for lack of

> healthcare insurx and that our life expectancy is worse than South

> Korea and the total cost of medical care per person is the highest in

> the world, @ $7,290 yet life expectancy is shorter than in most other

> developed nations and many developing ones. Lack of health coverage is

> a major factor in life span and contributes to an estimated 45,000

> deaths per year. These figures are for 2007 so just imagine what the

> cost is now in 2010.

> Source: Gerard , professor at s Hopkins Bloomberg School

> of Public health who studies health insurance worldwide.

..

And once Obamacare really gets into full swing you will most likely see

the numbers who die from lack of _adequate_ healthcare increase by

orders of magnitude; while the total costs will be many times what

Obamacare supporters are suggesting.

..

>

> so, you are saying that those 45,000+ Americans that die every year

> from lack to access to healthcare don't deserve to LIVE? Are you

> saying that those 46+ million people who don't and/or can't

> have/afford health insurx don't have a right to have the same options

> that you or I have just because we can afford to pay for health insurx??

..

I'm saying that none of those 45,000 have the right to demand that I

provide them health insurance or any other thing they might like to

have. In my county we the citizens voted to pay a 1/2 cent sales tax to

provide indigent health care. And we are not a particularly affluent

local; quite the opposite. So I doubt many of your supposed 45,000 came

from here. In any event if you remove the drunks, druggies and

sociopaths from the number you provide I suspect it would be much

smaller. PLUS those who choose to spend their money on cigarettes, beer

and large screen TV's instead of health insurance.

When you give someone the " right " to the income of another person then

you have made the second person the slave of the first person. That's a

" right " I won't buy.

January 12, 2010

I see it as more like 6 of one and 6,000 of another. It's still a PITA

to get treatment for free from the emergency room unless you're

absolutely destitute. Once you make healthcare a " right " then there are

about 15 million people [government figures] who will be immediately

eligible for inclusion in medicaid. No ability to pay [supposedly]; and

now no requirement to pay. Anyone vaguely familiar with economics knows

what happens when the price of any good or service is reduced to zero.

..

>

> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@...

> <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing>

> matchermaam <matchermaam>

>

> Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:10 pm (PST)

>

> People are paying and over paying for the insurance companies to

> enslave us right now.

> The issue is that all citizens need access to medical care and if this

> is not made possible the will continue to have to go to emergency

> rooms, and we will end up paying for their medical care with higher

> prices for doctors, hospitals and insurance. It's six of one half a

> dozen of the other. Pick your poison.

>

> Roni

January 12, 2010

It is the theories of socialism that have failed. Even when the

government assumed and applied the " right " to murder millions of their

own citizens they still failed.

Democracy will fail too, I'm afraid. When those who do not produce find

out they can vote themselves an ever greater share of the income of

those who do produce a point will be reached that those who do produce

will be reduced beyond that necessary to support the society. At that

point it will collapse. Most likely a dictator will then take over by

promising to take care of everyone's needs and so many will naively

follow that it becomes possible.

Obamacare is just one of many steps in that direction. Free medical

care for everyone, and no costs involved. How could anyone be so foolish...

..

> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@...

> <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing>

> matchermaam <matchermaam>

>

> Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:15 pm (PST)

>

> Steve you talk in theories. Theories are fine up to the point that

> they come up against reality. The reality of healthcare is that the

> only way the haves will not somehow pay for the havenots to get

> healthcare is to shoot them dead. Otherwise one way or the other

> their healthcare will be paid for.

>

> Roni

January 12, 2010

Tort reform would not remove the ability to sue; what it would do is

make it less profitable to sue for some frivolous cause. It would do

that by [hopefully] limiting compensation to lawyers who get literally

millions of dollars for some suits [in one of the tobacco suits it was a

billion or more]. Further it would do so by imposing a risk of having

to pay all legal fees on the loser, and that would discourage anyone

from suing if they did not in fact have a good case.

I actually don't have a good handle on this so maybe I'm off base; but I

know the cost of litigation and insurance to pay for possible litigation

are a major factor in our medical costs.

..

>

> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@...

> <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing>

> matchermaam <matchermaam>

>

> Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:24 pm (PST)

>

> Chuck, I agree there are frivolous law suits, but from what I see they

> come under the heading of female customer gets huge settlement for

> spilling hot coffee on herself.

>

> If a doctor did something that caused the death or total disability of

> one of your or anyone else's child that you knew, would you call that

> a frivolous law suit? Yet, if there is so called tort reform, that is

> what will be curtailed, the ability to sue for something that is anything

> but frivolous.

>

> Roni

January 12, 2010

Roni, did you read what he wrote? He told you they should be allowed to

buy insurance from whatever state they choose; that the regulation that

prevents that should be abolished.

..

>

> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@...

> <mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Rationing>

> matchermaam <matchermaam>

>

> Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:11 pm (PST)

>

> So now Chuck, you have a perfect example of a family who doesn't have

> access to healthcare through no fault of their own. So do you think

> they should just be allowed to become ill (G-d forbid) and not have a

> doctor or hospital that would take care of them?

> According to you, they have no right to health care.

>

> Roni

> <>Just because something

> isn't seen doesn't mean it's

> not there<>

>

> >

> > and whx portions do you object to?

>

> I already gave you the specific paragraphs. If those sections setting up

> a committee to ration care in the face of shortages are so benign, why

> did congress need to make expensive back room deals, the Cornhusker

> Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, to get Democrats to vote for it?

>

> There are several causes for the current high costs of health insurance.

> One is covering the cost of frivolous law suits. Yet, there is no

> mention of tort reform in the bill. Nor did I see any provision for

> improving the competency of medical providers, which seems to be the

> most common complaint with the current system voiced on this list.

>

> Another major cost factor is that state governments have negotiated

> large price breaks for state employees in exchange for effective

> insurance monopolies. The result is that the favored few insurance

> companies in those states can raise rates with impunity to make everyone

> else subsidize the savings to the state. Some states are much worse than

> others, so the cost of care varies wildly from state to state.

>

> My son's family is one of the many who have been priced out of health

> insurance, because he lives in one state but is employed in California.

> My son and his company cannot afford the out of state rates, but they

> are not allowed to buy from a much more competitive company from my

> son's home state, at about half the price. We could cover a near

> majority of the estimated uninsured by simply prohibiting state

> governments from interfering with free trade and competition.

>

> Chuck

January 12, 2010

Our pediatrician had to stop accepting medicaid because he was spending so

much time doing paperwork he was missing out on family time.

CW

-- Re: Rationing